Discover new books on Goodreads
Meet your next favorite book
Mind Body Problem Books
Showing 1-26 of 26
مراسلات ديكارت واليزابيث: حوار الفيلسوف والأميرة في الفلسفة والسياسة والعلوم (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.67 — 149 ratings — published 1989
The Origins and History of Consciousness (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.31 — 1,749 ratings — published 1949
The Mystery of Consciousness (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.75 — 903 ratings — published 1990
De Anima (On the Soul)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.03 — 6,931 ratings — published -350
The Upanishads (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.26 — 18,239 ratings — published -500
Meditations on First Philosophy, with Selections from the Objections and Replies (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.73 — 2,600 ratings — published 1641
Phaedo (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.07 — 17,367 ratings — published -380
The Mind’s I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.15 — 6,024 ratings — published 1981
Parmenides (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.01 — 3,191 ratings — published -340
What Is It Like to Be a Bat? (Unknown Binding)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.91 — 1,666 ratings — published 1974
Body and Mind (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.53 — 34 ratings — published 1970
Matter and Memory (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.10 — 2,788 ratings — published 1896
Philosophy of Mind: A Very Short Introduction (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.83 — 152 ratings — published
Introducing Consciousness (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.53 — 495 ratings — published 1996
Death: A Philosophy Course (Audiobook)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.03 — 647 ratings — published 1997
Absence of Mind: The Dispelling of Inwardness from the Modern Myth of the Self (The Terry Lectures Series)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.81 — 998 ratings — published 2010
In Search Of The Soul: Four Views Of The Mind-body Problem (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.52 — 25 ratings — published 2005
Neuroscience ad the Soul: The Human Person in Philosophy, Science, and Theology (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.30 — 10 ratings — published
A Brief History of the Soul (Brief Histories of Philosophy)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.97 — 79 ratings — published 2011
Body & Soul: Human Nature & the Crisis in Ethics (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.27 — 113 ratings — published 2000
Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics (The Frontiers Collection)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.91 — 46 ratings — published 1992
Waking the Tiger: Healing Trauma (Paperback)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.06 — 10,897 ratings — published 1997
Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order (Hardcover)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.07 — 3,356 ratings — published 2003
Rhythms of the Brain (Hardcover)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.31 — 278 ratings — published 2006
Mind-Body Deceptions: The Psychosomatics of Everyday Life (Hardcover)
by (shelved 1 time as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 4.00 — 8 ratings — published 1997
Soul, Body, and Survival: Essays on the Metaphysics of Human Persons (Paperback)
by (shelved 0 times as mind-body-problem)
avg rating 3.58 — 12 ratings — published 2001
“Positive arguments for the natural possibility of absent qualia have not been as prevalent as arguments for inverted qualia, but they have been made. The most detailed presentation of these arguments is given by Block (1978).
These arguments almost always have the same form. They consist in the exhibition of a realization of our functional organization in some unusual medium, combined with an appeal to intuition. It is pointed out, for example, that the organization of our brain might be simulated by the people of China or even mirrored in the economy of Bolivia. If we got every person in China to simulate a neuron (we would need to multiply the population by ten or one hundred, but no matter), and equipped them with radio links to simulate synaptic connections, then the functional organization would be there. But surely, says the argument, this baroque system would not be conscious!
There is a certain intuitive force to this argument. Many people have a strong feeling that a system like this is simply the wrong sort of thing to have a conscious experience. Such a “group mind” would seem to be the stuff of a science-fiction tale, rather than the kind of thing that could really exist. But there is only an intuitive force. This certainly falls far short of a knockdown argument. Many have pointed out that while it may be intuitively implausible that such a system should give rise to experience, it is equally intuitively implausible that a brain should give rise to experience! Whoever would have thought that this hunk of gray matter would be the sort of thing that could produce vivid subjective experiences? And yet it does. Of course this does not show that a nation's population could produce a mind, but it is a strong counter to the intuitive argument that it would not.
.
.
.
Once we realize how tightly a specification of functional organization constrains the structure of a system, it becomes less implausible that even the population of China could support conscious experience if organized appropriately. If we take our image of the population, speed it up by a factor of a million or so, and shrink it into an area the size of a head, we are left with something that looks a lot like a brain, except that it has homunculi—tiny people—where a brain would have neurons. On the face of it, there is not much reason to suppose that neurons should do any better a job than homunculi in supporting experience.”
― The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory
These arguments almost always have the same form. They consist in the exhibition of a realization of our functional organization in some unusual medium, combined with an appeal to intuition. It is pointed out, for example, that the organization of our brain might be simulated by the people of China or even mirrored in the economy of Bolivia. If we got every person in China to simulate a neuron (we would need to multiply the population by ten or one hundred, but no matter), and equipped them with radio links to simulate synaptic connections, then the functional organization would be there. But surely, says the argument, this baroque system would not be conscious!
There is a certain intuitive force to this argument. Many people have a strong feeling that a system like this is simply the wrong sort of thing to have a conscious experience. Such a “group mind” would seem to be the stuff of a science-fiction tale, rather than the kind of thing that could really exist. But there is only an intuitive force. This certainly falls far short of a knockdown argument. Many have pointed out that while it may be intuitively implausible that such a system should give rise to experience, it is equally intuitively implausible that a brain should give rise to experience! Whoever would have thought that this hunk of gray matter would be the sort of thing that could produce vivid subjective experiences? And yet it does. Of course this does not show that a nation's population could produce a mind, but it is a strong counter to the intuitive argument that it would not.
.
.
.
Once we realize how tightly a specification of functional organization constrains the structure of a system, it becomes less implausible that even the population of China could support conscious experience if organized appropriately. If we take our image of the population, speed it up by a factor of a million or so, and shrink it into an area the size of a head, we are left with something that looks a lot like a brain, except that it has homunculi—tiny people—where a brain would have neurons. On the face of it, there is not much reason to suppose that neurons should do any better a job than homunculi in supporting experience.”
― The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory
“It may be that some are unwilling to accept the possibility of conscious thermostats simply because we understand thermostats too well. We know everything about their processing, and there seems no reason to invoke consciousness. But thermostats are really no different from brains here. Even once we understand brain processing perfectly, there will still seem to be no reason to invoke consciousness. The only difference is that right now, what is going on inside a brain is enough of a mystery that one may be tempted to suppose that consciousness is somehow “located” in those brain processes that we do not yet understand. But as I have argued, even coming to understand those processes will not alone bring consciousness into the picture; so here, once again, brains and thermostats are on a par.
One might be bothered by the fact that one could build a thermostat oneself, without putting any consciousness in. But of course the same applies to a brain, at least in principle. When we build a brain (in reproduction and development, say), consciousness conies along for free; the same will go for a thermostat. We should not expect to locate consciousness as a physical component of the system! Some may worry about the fact that a thermostat is not alive; but it is hard to see why that should make a principled difference. A disembodied silicon brain of the sort discussed in the last chapter would arguably fail to qualify as alive, but we have seen that it might be conscious. And if the arguments in the last chapter are right, then the fact that a thermostat is not made up of biological components makes no difference, in principle.”
― The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory
One might be bothered by the fact that one could build a thermostat oneself, without putting any consciousness in. But of course the same applies to a brain, at least in principle. When we build a brain (in reproduction and development, say), consciousness conies along for free; the same will go for a thermostat. We should not expect to locate consciousness as a physical component of the system! Some may worry about the fact that a thermostat is not alive; but it is hard to see why that should make a principled difference. A disembodied silicon brain of the sort discussed in the last chapter would arguably fail to qualify as alive, but we have seen that it might be conscious. And if the arguments in the last chapter are right, then the fact that a thermostat is not made up of biological components makes no difference, in principle.”
― The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory

